[wanoff]

---

imps scoring

Should you call it a day now and what is 4♣ showing ?

[Jinksy]

4♣ shows whatever you've agreed it shows. Undiscussed, I'd assume suit, though I prefer doubleton.

It's hard to envisage P having a hand that makes slam good. Assuming he's got 4Ss, he'll need AKQx to make it much better than 50% on a (marked-ish) H lead. Then he'll need AK in clubs to avoid a finesse there. That doesn't leave much room to cover red suit losers. I think he'd need something like AKQx xx QJx AKQJ to make slam cold, but even if he didn't upgrade that to a 2♣ opening, he'd have bid the same with AKQx Qx QJx AKJx when slam looks hopeless, or AKQJ Jx xxx AKQx, when five is dangerously high, and I don't know how to sensibly find out.

I pass.

[the hog]

Opener could also have 5S.

However lets give opener
AKxx
Kx
Axx
KQJx

and slam depends on the S break or the Q falling
I used to play the 4C bid as a super accept with the CA. A partner convinced me that a FAR better use for the bid is a super accept with a source of tricks in the suit, as in my example above. Note that with these examples from the above post #2 AKQx Qx QJx AKJx , or AKQJ Jx xxx AKQx a good partner would not cue 4C with that rubbish in the reds. So yes, playing it as a source of tricks in a good hand, I would bid 5H and pass opener's 5S.

[petterb]

the hog, on 2015-January-04, 00:49, said:

However lets give opener
AKxx
Kx
Axx
KQJx

Opener would bid 4H with that hand. 4S denies a heart control.

[the hog]

Maybe but dont forget 4c was not a cue for me but a source of tricks. Perhaps you could give him qjx of h instead and change the ds to Ax. Now of course the contract is wrongsided. No on second thoughts the 4c bid has to show sharp cards in the reds by definition as well as the c tricks.

10 mins later - I am sure that the 4S bid would not deny HK or A. Opener has already said he is prepared to play the 10 tick game opposite xxxxx and out. There is no way he would do that with QJx of H. That is why I said the hands postulated in Jinksy's post above are not a possible holding for a good player - the values are too soft. A 3NT bid would make more sense. So why bid 4S rather than H? To ensure the HK is rightsided.! It would be a shame to be in 6 from the wrong side if responder held Qxxxxx xx Kxx Ax would it not?

Of course all of this is conjecture, depending on how you play 4C.

[Mbodell]

Opposite me, I'd blackwood and go on to 6 if only missing 1 kc and not Q (which I'd expect to be true the vast majority of the time). But for me the break would show a good fit for spades and a max/good hand for slams (controls not quacks) and when you add that to no heart A/K, I think that I'd have 5 or 6 of the 6 ♠AKQ♦A♣AK nearly always (given I can't have AK of hearts of K of diamonds). And I'd expect quacks to be with controls to evaluate as good for slam.

[Fluffy]

I expect 5 or 6 clubs in front with 3/4 spades, We have a decent hand but we lack keycards on the suits we need them. As Jinksy said it is so very likely we will have 12 tricks but opponents will win the race with the heart lead.

I can see some decent slams when partner has ♠AQxx ♥Qx ♦Ax ♣AKJ10x and we just need some finessing, but I doubt we will have a cold slam.

[nige1]

wanoff, on 2015-January-03, 13:24, said:

imps scoring
Should you call it a day now and
what is 4♣ showing ?

---

IMO: 4♣ may be a cue-bid but a source of tricks is a more useful agreement. Whatever it means 4♠ seems enough. Your 4♦ cue was optimistic and you should pass 4♠. Assuming 4♠ denies ♥K, for slam to be good you need a miracle e.g.
♠ A K x x ♥ x x x ♦ A x ♣ A K Q J making a grand on a good day.

[whereagles]

I'm gonna pass.. too many losers. The diamond cue didn't get pard excited, so he's probably closer to a min than a max.

[the hog]

nige1, on 2015-January-05, 03:49, said:

IMO: 4♣ may be a cue-bid but a source of tricks is a more useful agreement. Whatever it means 4♠ seems enough. Your 4♦ cue was optimistic and you should pass 4♠. Assuming 4♠ denies ♥K, for slam to be good you need a miracle e.g.
♠ A K x x ♥ x x x ♦ A x ♣ A K Q J making a grand on a good day.

I was skeptical until I tried it, (source of tricks). It is far more sensible than the standard cue bid.

[whereagles]

Would you superaccept with 3 cards, Ron? Say

Axx
Qx
AJx
AKQxx

[aguahombre]

the hog, on 2015-January-04, 02:28, said:

Opener has already said he is prepared to play the 10 tick game opposite xxxxx and out. There is no way he would do that with QJx of H.

whereagles, on 2015-January-06, 03:53, said:

Would you superaccept with 3 cards, Ron? Say

Axx
Qx
AJx
AKQxx

It seems he wouldn't superaccept via 4c without primes in the red suits even with 4 Spades.

With "source of tricks" as played by Mr. Hog (and me) if we do go for slam with the OP hand, we will do so knowing we are off a Key and the trump queen without asking.

There is no room for the trump queen holding 13 pts in the non-spade suits. AKQX KX AXX KQJX is too strong. A hand with AKXXX of Spades and a "side source" of tricks would not be opened with a slam-killing 2NT.

[the hog]

whereagles, on 2015-January-06, 03:53, said:

Would you superaccept with 3 cards, Ron? Say

Axx
Qx
AJx
AKQxx

No I would not. For a start I would never superaccept without 4 nor with the HQx. You are contracting for a 10 trick game after all. Opposite xxx in H you have 2 losers straight away.

[the hog]

aguahombre, on 2015-January-06, 04:43, said:

It seems he wouldn't superaccept via 4c without primes in the red suits even with 4 Spades.

With "source of tricks" as played by Mr. Hog (and me) if we do go for slam with the OP hand, we will do so knowing we are off a Key and the trump queen without asking.

There is no room for the trump queen holding 13 pts in the non-spade suits. AKQX KX AXX KQJX is too strong. A hand with AKXXX of Spades and a "side source" of tricks would not be opened with a slam-killing 2NT.

Yes, I agree totally with this post.

[whereagles]

Roger that.

[lowerline]

wanoff, on 2015-January-03, 13:24, said:

---

imps scoring

Should you call it a day now and what is 4♣ showing ?

I think 4♣ should show a control with 4crd spade support. I assume 4♥ would have been Last Train? Pass.

S.

[wanoff]

Thanks for all of your replies.
I thought it was standard that this transfer break showed 4cd support and 'Tops' (obviously not) and was just wondering if it could also be a minimum.
Give partner AQxx QJ Axx AKxx min and it's getting towards 75%. There are probably more maximums that make the slam 50+%.

Needless to say, I pushed on and we got to 5S-1. Partner had upgraded his hand due to a source of tricks in clubs.

The full hand

---

[Fluffy]

The way I play with a max with top tricks and support I jumpt to 4♠ reserving 4x for souce of tricks.